You are here:Home/Aust. Defence Bases Contaminated With PFOA (Fluoride)

It has rendered some farm land unusable, propertyvalues have plummeted, and residents havebeen unable to drink their bore water.

The bonding of two chemicals – being fluorine and carbon in 1940seemed to be a huge break through for many new processes, however the health risks were found some time latter. These products have been banned in 171 countries though not yet banned in Australia. ?

Fluorides are “Protected Pollutants” in Australia!If the truth about this chemical had not been covered up for so longthe problems listed below would have never hav occurred.

EDITORS COMMENT:The RAAF once used harmless,
environmentally friendly, fermented blood and bone,and liquorice to make fire fighting foam.It was great to make the grass grow, I know, I used it.

“There appears to be more concern being shown to landholders who have had their land contaminated by AFFF (PFOS) than concern for the mental health and wellbeing of the serving members who handled the concentrated product…“↓ ↓ ↓

‘Enviropacific’is removing PFAS from the airport at Coolangatta
Airport Queensland

Dr. Mariann Lloyd-Smith

The new levels issued by the EPA in the US are 0.07 parts per billion
for both PFOA and PFOS. Both chemicals have been linked
with a range of disorders, including thyroid issues,
pregnancy complications and high cholesterol.The EPA report also details a possible connection between
PFOS and bladder, colon and prostate cancer.

It has rendered some farm land unusable, property values have plummeted, and residents have been unable to drink their bore water.

The same chemical was contained in Teflon and found in a West Virginian Town Water Supply the late 1990s, sparking legal action against Teflon manufacturer DuPont, and eventually won a $US70 million settlement for almost 70,000 people who might have been exposed to the contaminated water.

Kentucky-based lawyer Robert Bilott brought the class action on behalf of the residents and said he had been watching Australia’s response to the growing contamination issue with interest.

“A lot of time and a lot of resources can be saved by the fact that a lot of this very complicated and expensive research has already been done,” Mr Bilott said.

“I think it would be important to take advantage of the data that already exists so it’s not a delayed response to folks who are drinking this.”

Six diseases linked to PFOA: US study finds

The Australian Defence Department maintains there is no strong links between PFOA and serious human health effects.

Queensland Health advice said adverse health effects had been found in animals but not in humans.

But as part of the US class action, an independent scientific panel spent more than $US30 million studying the chemical and its human health effects.

“One of the things that was remarkable about it was they ended up getting blood data from 69,000 people in that community,” Mr Bilott said.

“They ended up concluding that there was six disease linked to drinking this chemical in your water for over a year
and that was kidney cancer, testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, preeclampsia and high cholesterol.

“And that data is out there.”

Mr Bilott also raised concerns about Australia’s drinking guidelines for the chemical.

An independent review by a toxicologist released earlier this month found Australia should maintain its standards for the chemical, despite a decision by the United States Environment Protection Agency to dramatically lower what it considered safe.

“It’s the same chemical, it’s the same science and it’s the same knowledge, so I’m not quite sure why there would be any distinction,” Mr Bilott said.

A frequently asked questions document on the Defence Department website said the United States health study could not be used in Australia. [?]

“The findings of this health study could have been impacted by many location- and population-specific factors [for example, routes of exposure, background conditions and lifestyle factors], which cannot necessarily be translated to the Oakey community,” the document read.

“In addition, many factors can influence a person’s health and therefore it is challenging to link a person’s health issue unequivocally to PFOS [perfluorooctane sulfonate] and PFOA exposure.”

The Federal Government is undertaking its own epidemiological study of the human health effects of the PFOA chemical. [?]

Some say this is the worst pollution in Australia’s history – on 70+ sites,

↑ WATCH ↑

The Federal Government could face compensation claims across New South Wales, Queensland and the Northern Territory, after the Department of Defence admitted it was slow to warn people about groundwater contamination from Army air bases.

.

A lawyer leading the class action in the southern Queensland town of Oakey said he wouldsoon head to the NT town of Katherine to speak to locals about a joint lawsuit there in thewake of this week’s revelations on the ABC’s Four Corners program.On the program, a Defence official admitted they should have issued warnings three years
earlier about toxic firefighting foam pollution from Army bases.The department said the cost to taxpayers to clean up the problem nationwide would likelyamount to hundreds of millions of dollars.

About 500 people are part of a class action in Oakey, where the toxic compoundsPFOS and PFOA [ which contain fluoride ] have spread into groundwater and soil onsurrounding properties. In NSW, residents near the RAAF Williamtown base launched theirown class action last year.

Fluorides are“Protected Pollutants”The use of the F. word is censored.
The media can only refer to fluoride
in glowing terms and associate
it with dental health.

Mariann Lloyd-Smith, National Toxics Network senior advisor The New South Wales

The EPA said its investigation into PFOS and PFOA will focus on sites where the chemicals may have been used in large quantities including airports, firefighting training facilities and industrial sites.

In a statement last month, Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) said international research was yet to fully understand the ecological impacts, if any, and there was “no proven direct link to any adverse health effects”.

Commissioner Greg Mullins said FRNSW withdrew the use of these foams for both firefighting and training progressively until they were fully eliminated in 2007 as information emerged on possible hazards associated with PFCs.

But National Toxics Network senior advisor Mariann Lloyd-Smith said there was a wealth of evidence.

“To say that we don’t fully understand or there’s not a direct proven link is misleading,” she said.

“One can only wonder if it’s an attempt to protect their liability.

“People need to know these are incredibly serious toxins.

“These are chemicals that we really need to address quickly, with as much precaution as we possibly can to protect humans and, of course, the wildlife and the environment.”

Dr Lloyd-Smith is urging the Fire and Rescue NSW to stop downplaying the impacts of the firefighting foam.

She said she had a message for the Commissioner Greg Mullins.

“Stop trying to downplay the seriousness of this issue,” she said.

“They are incredibly serious toxins, and it is a real worry for those people living around them.

“Warn the population, start working out how you’re going to be able to compensate people, start protecting your population, which is really the job,” Dr Lloyd-Smith said.

Staff and community highest priority, Commissioner said

In a statement on Thursday, FRNSW said it “is consulting with the Department of Health and the Fire Brigade Employees Union whilst taking a cautious, measured approach”.

“The safety of our staff and the community are our highest priority,” Commissioner Mullins said.

“Together with the EPA we have arranged for more comprehensive testing, with results expected to take several more weeks.

“FRNSW will work with a range of other agencies including local councils, water authorities, Department of Health, and NSW EPA to ensure any potential risk of PFC contamination outside of the training sites is identified and limited.

“We will act immediately on any expert advice concerning health or environmental impacts,” he said.

PFOAs And Newborns

In 2007, the shocking results of a study conducted at the John Hopkin’s Medical
Centre (Bethesda, MD) showed that levels of the toxic PFOA were found in
100% of a sample of almost 300 newborns, delivered at the hospital.

Samples of umbilical chord blood were also shown to contain varying levels
of PFOS.Asians (6 ng/ml) had the highest concentration, followed by Blacks
(5.1 ng/ml) and Whites (4.2 ng/ml).
Males babies had higher PFOS and PFOA than females.

Obese and underweight mothers had slightly higher concentrations than
women of normal weight.

Other studies have found that some of the highest levels of
PFOA and PFOS have been in children.

PFOS & PFOA In The Environment

On average, Vermont residents have PFOA blood levels of 10 micrograms per liter.

PFOS and PFOA are increasingly being phased out of modern foams.
Concentrations in human blood appear to be decreasing in the
US, although they are still rising in China. Today they remain
significant residual contaminants at many sites globally,
for example, at many of the world’s 49,000 airports
(including 450 civilian and military airports in Australia).